A biomechanical analysis of the strongman log lift and comparison with weightlifting's clean and jerk

Paul W. Winwood, John B. Cronin, Scott R. Brown, Justin W. L. Keogh

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)
32 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

This study compared the biomechanical characteristics of the log lift and clean and jerk. Six experienced male strongman athletes performed log lifts and clean and jerks at 70% of their 1RM clean and jerk. Significant (p<0.05) between-exercise kinematic differences were observed throughout all the lifting phases, except at lift completion. The log lift demonstrated significantly greater trunk (↑24%) and hip (↑9%) range of motion than the clean and jerk. Significantly greater peak bar velocities were achieved in the clean and jerk in the second pull (16%) and the jerk (↑14%). While similarities existed in ground reaction force data between the lifts, mean and peak powers were significantly greater (↑40% to ↑64%) in propulsive phases of the clean and jerk. The log lift may be an effective conditioning stimulus to teach rapid triple extension while generating similar vertical and anterior-propulsive forces as the clean and jerk with the same given load.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)869-886
Number of pages18
JournalInternational Journal of Sports Science and Coaching
Volume10
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 2015

Cite this

@article{267389131c9f405086b6506a6b6d2512,
title = "A biomechanical analysis of the strongman log lift and comparison with weightlifting's clean and jerk",
abstract = "This study compared the biomechanical characteristics of the log lift and clean and jerk. Six experienced male strongman athletes performed log lifts and clean and jerks at 70{\%} of their 1RM clean and jerk. Significant (p<0.05) between-exercise kinematic differences were observed throughout all the lifting phases, except at lift completion. The log lift demonstrated significantly greater trunk (↑24{\%}) and hip (↑9{\%}) range of motion than the clean and jerk. Significantly greater peak bar velocities were achieved in the clean and jerk in the second pull (16{\%}) and the jerk (↑14{\%}). While similarities existed in ground reaction force data between the lifts, mean and peak powers were significantly greater (↑40{\%} to ↑64{\%}) in propulsive phases of the clean and jerk. The log lift may be an effective conditioning stimulus to teach rapid triple extension while generating similar vertical and anterior-propulsive forces as the clean and jerk with the same given load.",
author = "Winwood, {Paul W.} and Cronin, {John B.} and Brown, {Scott R.} and Keogh, {Justin W. L.}",
year = "2015",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1260/1747-9541.10.5.869",
language = "English",
volume = "10",
pages = "869--886",
journal = "International Journal of Sports Science and Coaching",
issn = "1747-9541",
publisher = "Sage Publications India Pvt. Ltd",
number = "5",

}

A biomechanical analysis of the strongman log lift and comparison with weightlifting's clean and jerk. / Winwood, Paul W.; Cronin, John B.; Brown, Scott R.; Keogh, Justin W. L.

In: International Journal of Sports Science and Coaching, Vol. 10, No. 5, 10.2015, p. 869-886.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - A biomechanical analysis of the strongman log lift and comparison with weightlifting's clean and jerk

AU - Winwood, Paul W.

AU - Cronin, John B.

AU - Brown, Scott R.

AU - Keogh, Justin W. L.

PY - 2015/10

Y1 - 2015/10

N2 - This study compared the biomechanical characteristics of the log lift and clean and jerk. Six experienced male strongman athletes performed log lifts and clean and jerks at 70% of their 1RM clean and jerk. Significant (p<0.05) between-exercise kinematic differences were observed throughout all the lifting phases, except at lift completion. The log lift demonstrated significantly greater trunk (↑24%) and hip (↑9%) range of motion than the clean and jerk. Significantly greater peak bar velocities were achieved in the clean and jerk in the second pull (16%) and the jerk (↑14%). While similarities existed in ground reaction force data between the lifts, mean and peak powers were significantly greater (↑40% to ↑64%) in propulsive phases of the clean and jerk. The log lift may be an effective conditioning stimulus to teach rapid triple extension while generating similar vertical and anterior-propulsive forces as the clean and jerk with the same given load.

AB - This study compared the biomechanical characteristics of the log lift and clean and jerk. Six experienced male strongman athletes performed log lifts and clean and jerks at 70% of their 1RM clean and jerk. Significant (p<0.05) between-exercise kinematic differences were observed throughout all the lifting phases, except at lift completion. The log lift demonstrated significantly greater trunk (↑24%) and hip (↑9%) range of motion than the clean and jerk. Significantly greater peak bar velocities were achieved in the clean and jerk in the second pull (16%) and the jerk (↑14%). While similarities existed in ground reaction force data between the lifts, mean and peak powers were significantly greater (↑40% to ↑64%) in propulsive phases of the clean and jerk. The log lift may be an effective conditioning stimulus to teach rapid triple extension while generating similar vertical and anterior-propulsive forces as the clean and jerk with the same given load.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84959455860&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1260/1747-9541.10.5.869

DO - 10.1260/1747-9541.10.5.869

M3 - Article

VL - 10

SP - 869

EP - 886

JO - International Journal of Sports Science and Coaching

JF - International Journal of Sports Science and Coaching

SN - 1747-9541

IS - 5

ER -